some skepisms, 1. "I have not seen God. I have felt the invisible presence"2. What if there is a rock in the middle of a road, a blind person is speeding towards it, ...they say that they can't see it. Would you recommend him to keep speeding?

No you got it the wrong way round....things created the big bang, Einstein ripped off others work. I did read the biography ....of the universe, its called physics, try it. might clean all that gunk that is between your ears out.

Logged

some skepisms, 1. "I have not seen God. I have felt the invisible presence"2. What if there is a rock in the middle of a road, a blind person is speeding towards it, ...they say that they can't see it. Would you recommend him to keep speeding?

Yes all falsifiable theories are falsifiable and what hasn't been demonstrated. yes go update your theory it has been almost 2 minutes, must keep it current ie make it up as you go along.

Logged

some skepisms, 1. "I have not seen God. I have felt the invisible presence"2. What if there is a rock in the middle of a road, a blind person is speeding towards it, ...they say that they can't see it. Would you recommend him to keep speeding?

No you got it the wrong way round....things created the big bang, Einstein ripped off others work. I did read the biography ....of the universe, its called physics, try it. might clean all that gunk that is between your ears out.

What things? Things created God? What's the difference eh!?

I don't have gunk between my ears but thanks for caring. awwwwwww

I study physics on the Science Channel. What am I to replace my happiness with eh!? Happiness is not gunk. Whut?

You get your science from tv and youtube oh fer... yes i am serious, i seriously don't give a fuk how you take it.

don't remove the gunk you will disappear. do you think you are owed happiness.

Logged

some skepisms, 1. "I have not seen God. I have felt the invisible presence"2. What if there is a rock in the middle of a road, a blind person is speeding towards it, ...they say that they can't see it. Would you recommend him to keep speeding?

You get your science from tv and youtube oh fer... yes i am serious, i seriously don't give a fuk how you take it.

don't remove the gunk you will disappear. do you think you are owed happiness.

and WWGHA, you one out. I desire happiness. Yes I deserve it and so do you. I think we all do. It used to be about shelter, food and water; physical needs. Now it's about happiness/emotionaal and how that relates to our health. A world of happy people would be a fantastically awesome place to raise families. Oh What a Wonderful World lalalalala....

No offence but you are one stupid hippy. your last post makes me so unhappy, why are you doing this to me.

Logged

some skepisms, 1. "I have not seen God. I have felt the invisible presence"2. What if there is a rock in the middle of a road, a blind person is speeding towards it, ...they say that they can't see it. Would you recommend him to keep speeding?

Alright, can you please lay off the insults, eh!? It's one thing to disagree and to point out the reasons why, but personal attacks are uncalled for.

I would come to your defense if the same was done to you, or any other poster for that matter (with the exception of perhaps two particular theists whose opinions I find particularly abhorrent. You know who you are).

Logged

The cosmos is also within us. We are made of star stuff.

The only thing bigger than the universe is humanity's collective sense of self-importance.

Ignoring eh!'s unfortunate comments, he is right about the Big Bang theory being falsifiable.The Big Bang theory makes several predictions. It predicted the cosmic background radiation (CBR), among other things. Not only that, but it predicted what shape it would take. Note, of course, that this was a prediction based on incomplete data (at the time) and assuming "perfect" conditions, so the initial result was less than perfect. There's a lot of static in the observations, mostly due to, I believe, planets and other large bodies getting in the way, as well as defects in the devices themselves[1]. Here's an image:The image on top is the prediction, while the bottom one represents the measurements taken.

One how long did it take and how many scientist did it take to do this?

[wiki=History of the Big Bang theory]Wikipedia[/wiki] says that spiral nebulae (misidentified spiral galaxies) were first observed to be receding in 1910. If we assume this to be the beginning, it took approximately 104 years, as the idea is still being studied today. If we take into account that the idea itself was proposed in 1927, it took about 87 years (again, the idea is still being studied nowadays).I don't know how many scientists were involved, but, given the time frame and significance of this theory, it was probably a lot. If I had to guess (and I cannot stress this enough: it is a guess), I'd say the number is in the hundreds - maybe thousands - of scientists.

Logged

My names are many, yet I am One.-Orion, son of Fire and Light, Sol Invictus.

some skepisms, 1. "I have not seen God. I have felt the invisible presence"2. What if there is a rock in the middle of a road, a blind person is speeding towards it, ...they say that they can't see it. Would you recommend him to keep speeding?

One how long did it take and how many scientist did it take to do this?

[wiki=History of the Big Bang theory]Wikipedia[/wiki] says that spiral nebulae (misidentified spiral galaxies) were first observed to be receding in 1910. If we assume this to be the beginning, it took approximately 104 years, as the idea is still being studied today. If we take into account that the idea itself was proposed in 1927, it took about 87 years (again, the idea is still being studied nowadays).I don't know how many scientists were involved, but, given the time frame and significance of this theory, it was probably a lot. If I had to guess (and I cannot stress this enough: it is a guess), I'd say the number is in the hundreds - maybe thousands - of scientists.

Okay so my point is it took many scientists and many years. I think mine will take a while as well. The more we learn about the big bang the more we will learn about my idea. I guess only time will tell.

I'm pretty sure there are others that think this might be where God come from.

Thanks for the info One, you're so smart. That grammar of your's is off the charts. Immaculate spelling, punctuation and knowing when to use capital letters. I can't wait to read your book.

Okay so my point is it took many scientists and many years. I think mine will take a while as well. The more we learn about the big bang the more we will learn about my idea. I guess only time will tell.

I'm pretty sure there are others that think this might be where God come from.

Your idea is not new. It's thousands of years old at best. Many philosophers (all of them, I'd bet) have posited the existence of god(s) and tried to come up with arguments for it. In, let's say, 500 years, nothing has unequivocally pointed in that direction. However, in the ~100 years since the Big Bang theory was proposed, we've made enormous advances in it. This should give you some idea as to why I (and others) believe you're wrong.

Thanks for the info One, you're so smart. That grammar of your's is off the charts. Immaculate spelling, punctuation and knowing when to use capital letters. I can't wait to read your book.

Thanks, but I doubt I'll be telling anyone online which pseudonym I used when publishing it, assuming it even gets published by an actual publisher. However, I have asked for advice from one of my teachers who has written several short books (even in comparison to the length I predict mine will be). In addition, I have already finished the first chapter's first draft. Now I'm waiting for a friend to proof-read it while I work on my fan fictions.

Logged

My names are many, yet I am One.-Orion, son of Fire and Light, Sol Invictus.

Okay so my point is it took many scientists and many years. I think mine will take a while as well. The more we learn about the big bang the more we will learn about my idea. I guess only time will tell.

I'm pretty sure there are others that think this might be where God come from.

Your idea is not new. It's thousands of years old at best. Many philosophers (all of them, I'd bet) have posited the existence of god(s) and tried to come up with arguments for it. In, let's say, 500 years, nothing has unequivocally pointed in that direction. However, in the ~100 years since the Big Bang theory was proposed, we've made enormous advances in it. This should give you some idea as to why I (and others) believe you're wrong.

Thanks for the info One, you're so smart. That grammar of your's is off the charts. Immaculate spelling, punctuation and knowing when to use capital letters. I can't wait to read your book.

Thanks, but I doubt I'll be telling anyone online which pseudonym I used when publishing it, assuming it even gets published by an actual publisher. However, I have asked for advice from one of my teachers who has written several short books (even in comparison to the length I predict mine will be). In addition, I have already finished the first chapter's first draft. Now I'm waiting for a friend to proof-read it while I work on my fan fictions.

I am not talking about the existence of God but that God could have been formed in the big bang. That couldn't have possibly come around until the actual theory. So what I'm saying is there are others who think God could have been formed in the big bang.

It'll get published. Think positive. Make it immaculate. Give them no other choice. Be that damn good.

I am not talking about the existence of God but that God could have been formed in the big bang. That couldn't have possibly come around until the actual theory. So what I'm saying is there are others who think God could have been formed in the big bang.

Hindu cosmology, according to Wikipedia[1], makes claims similar to the Big Bang theory. It stands to reason that there have been those who thought what you think upon hearing those claims. Of course, this is speculative in nature.

I am not talking about the existence of God but that God could have been formed in the big bang.

And invisible pink flying magic unicorns could be playing on the backside of Pluto. Who cares! What is 'possible' is not important. What is important is what can be demonstrated to be most likely the case. Mere possibility is off-topic and pointless b/c we do not base our beliefs upon what is just possible.

I am not talking about the existence of God but that God could have been formed in the big bang.

And invisible pink flying magic unicorns could be playing on the backside of Pluto. Who cares! What is 'possible' is not important. What is important is what can be demonstrated to be most likely the case. Mere possibility is off-topic and pointless b/c we do not base our beliefs upon what is just possible.

Median I know you can do better than that. Sounds like an emotional response. No body has ever demonstrated the Big Bang. It is not possible!

I am not talking about the existence of God but that God could have been formed in the big bang.

And invisible pink flying magic unicorns could be playing on the backside of Pluto. Who cares! What is 'possible' is not important. What is important is what can be demonstrated to be most likely the case. Mere possibility is off-topic and pointless b/c we do not base our beliefs upon what is just possible.

Median I know you can do better than that. Sounds like an emotional response. No body has ever demonstrated the Big Bang. It is not possible!

Oh on the contrary, and it sounds like you did not read my response carefully enough. We have in fact demonstrated the big bang model sufficiently enough to warrant acceptance of it's predictions (because it has stood the test of observation, via the cosmic background radiation, the mathematics that coincidences with the data and predictions, and the cosmos data that has been collected through time). So we do in fact have sufficient reason for accepting the model as the best explanation, with the most power of explaining the given facts that we have.

On the other hand, you do not have this with an alleged "God" thing. 1) Such an alleged being has never been coherently or logically defined and 2) that appeal to such a thing amounts to an argument from ignorance fallacy ("I can't explain this any other way. Therefore God did it"). So the argument is fallacious and unsound right from git go and it should be abandoned.

If your god was hiding, then you'd be right. Of course, then we'd have to ask why a benevolent deity would do that.

God is not a superhero. I believe God is not seen because God wants us to fix our own problems. I am so afraid that it's going to take an astrological tragedy of death and destruction before this change happens. They just announced that they're going to approve fracking in NC.

God is not a superhero. I believe God is not seen because God wants us to fix our own problems. I am so afraid that it's going to take an astrological tragedy of death and destruction before this change happens.

Then your god is worth less than Doctor Manhattan, who uses his godly powers[1] to help mankind. He tries, anyway. According to himself, "[he] can change a lot of things, but [he] can't change human nature".

God is not a superhero. I believe God is not seen because God wants us to fix our own problems. I am so afraid that it's going to take an astrological tragedy of death and destruction before this change happens.

Then your god is worth less than Doctor Manhattan, who uses his godly powers[1] to help mankind. He tries, anyway. According to himself, "[he] can change a lot of things, but [he] can't change human nature".